The Death of Privacy. Who cares?

The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

FirmhandKY -> The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (2/27/2007 10:40:57 AM)
The changes that the internet and other technologies have and are bringing to society has always been an issue that fascinates me. "Privacy" is one of those areas of society that is in the midst of a change, and I think is pretty relevant to a lot of the people on this site. Read this article: The Transparent Society and Its Clueless Adult Enemies Here is the heart of article: ... Another approach is simply to ignore old ideas about privacy and make your private life public. In New York magazine, Emily Nussbaum argues that today's young people are doing exactly that and, in the process, completely redefining the idea of privacy. [W]hat we're discussing is something more radical if only because it is more ordinary: the fact that we are in the sticky center of a vast psychological experiment, one that's only just begun to show results. More young people are putting more personal information out in public than any older person ever would--and yet they seem mysteriously healthy and normal, save for an entirely different definition of privacy. From their perspective, it's the extreme caution of the earlier generation that’s the narcissistic thing. Or, as Kitty put it to me, "Why not? What’s the worst that's going to happen? Twenty years down the road, someone's gonna find your picture? Just make sure it's a great picture." Do you agree with this? Is privacy disappearing? And is this a good thing, or a bad thing? Has the internet changed your expectations of privacy? FirmKY

farglebargle -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (2/27/2007 10:47:12 AM)
Since all the data traversing the internet is copied to Governmental agencies, which may be outsourcing the processing to 3rd parties? NOTHING on the net, unless encrypted should be expected to remain confidential. Even encryption is no guarantee, but it makes the statement, "NOT for Your Eyes" to anyone copying the data.

asubmissiveheart -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (2/27/2007 3:38:51 PM)
It is a sign of the times, big brother knows more about us than most people realize.

SusanofO -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (2/27/2007 3:52:30 PM)
Maybe they've simply given up, because the net is pretty hard to police, and the government doesn't seem all that interested, in some cases, in defining what is meant by "private" information in liberal terms. It scares me when it comes to things like possible genetic pre-disposition for diseases and that kind of information, that might become possible for insurance companies to use to potentially deny customers coverage for say, being supposedly prone to breast cancer, etc. It scares me that someone could committ ID Fraud w/my credit card information if they are a really good computer hacker (I use the web all the time for internet purchases). I'd think if there is an "expectation of privacy" on the part of the user, or consumer of the internet, then private is still private, meaning not meant for public consumption - despite the proliferation of blogs and people being willing to bare all on a web-cam (Paris Hilton and Pamela Anderson sex videos, etc). Obviously, they didn't mean for these to come out to the public - that was never their intent when they were made. But if someone is gonna bare all on the internet, for example (like a Playboy Bunny or someone who is paid for it), and then complain 20 years later about someone publishing their pics elsewhere, and they are simply ranting that the pics are 'out there', I think it can ring hollow. They may be able to complain they should be financially re-imbursed, and maybe they can even sue and win, but they did take them, and they are in the "entertainment business", and "stuff happens' if you are, IMO. I'm not saying it's a great thing, just that kind of thing can happen more often in the entertainment industry (I wouldn't want to be a celebrity for that reason - your life can cease to be your own, in many ways). Remember (Bob Guccione - CEO of Penthouse magazine, and Miss America 1984, can't think of her name right now, but he published some unsavory pics of her some 3rd party sold to him years ago-that she had, in fact taken for another magazine, for money - at least she thought they were unsavory) then I say: Caveat Emptor (or whatever) - they should maybe have known better...and in those cases, well, sometimes there is no such thing as bad publicity, in terms of launching a career in show-biz, maybe. - Susan

farglebargle -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (2/27/2007 3:57:56 PM)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanessa_Lynn_Williams Vanessa Lynn Williams (born March 18, 1963) is a Grammy and Tony Award nominated American R&B/Pop/theatrical singer and actress. In 1983, Williams made history when she became the first African-American woman to be crowned Miss America. Her reign as Miss America came to an early and abrupt end when she resigned her title in scandal. However, she has since gone on to a successful entertainment career. In her current project she plays Wilhelmina Slater on the award-winning comedy, Ugly Betty. ... Controversy and resignation Controversy erupted in the summer of 1984 when it was discovered that in 1982, she had posed nude for photographs — including scenes of graphic exposure and lesbian theme. The news came to light when adult magazine Penthouse announced that they would be publishing the photos in their September 1984 issue, without her consent. After several days of media frenzy, Williams chose to resign her position on July 23, 1984. The crown was given to Suzette Charles (making her the second African-American Miss America), 54 days before the start of the pageant for Miss America 1985. At the time, many believed Williams' reputation would never recover from the scandal.

SusanofO -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (2/27/2007 4:01:27 PM)
Thanks for the information, farglebargle. Do you remember Suzette Charles? I don't. I do know who Vanessa Williams is, though. That controversy helped launch her career (even though she is talented in her own right, of course, and also pretty, IMO). I am not saying it's fair or right, I am saying it didn't hurt her all that much, probably, financially. As far as colleges monitoring student's speech, behavior, etc. I went to a Catholic school for which my parent's paid tuition. If you violated their code of conduct, they could indeed kick you out, and were well within their rights to do that. I am not sure if the same applies to colleges or not. They are not really public institutions, are they? I mean, the Feds didn't pay for my college education, my parents did. I think there are a few states (some in Califiornia and Arizona) in which the state offers free tuition. Beyond that , I am not sure. - Susan

Sanity -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (2/27/2007 4:46:35 PM)
I've been thinking about the loss of privacy a lot lately. Wherever I am, my cell phones are triangulated every moment of the day, and top secret satellites have an unknowable ability to track me from outer space. I use my electronic keys to open locks in the buildings where I work, and with every door I pass through my whereabouts at that particular time are recorded on a computer somewhere. When I log into my PC I am tracked with cookies and IP addresses, if I buy something with plastic my purchases are recorded... it goes on and on. Red light cameras and security cameras are everywhere, and their popularity is growing. In many ways it's insane: in others, it's good to have the security these days. Sometimes I hear a very wide open place in Canada or Montana calling me, and the desire to answer that call grows stronger every day.

pahunkboy -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (3/1/2007 2:23:53 PM)
Well-Im not too comfortable with this experiment. Anything can be used against you. The ebb and flow of liberal -conservative attitudes, the nature of litigious society, ehtics, social norms- etc. In 1800s- you were KNOWN by the whole community. Every thing you did- said etc. So in a sense we return to this- HOWEVER; how does it play out when you need a lawyer to fart!!! What is legal is not always moral/ehtical and vice versa. As a tool- consider a hammer- you can build a house- wreck a house. same tool. Same goes with teck with is morphing so fast- it is outdated in 6 months. In time we will all be chipped. It will open doors, pay bills- turn your lights on when entering room. Recall the unibomber. He had a bit of a point- time will tell- as his theory that the grid is CONTROL. Well- consider how dependent we are if the grid goes down? How long could you live- if electric was out 6 months.... ???

FirmhandKY -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (3/1/2007 3:06:35 PM)
pahunkboy, One of the things that I think may be good in the long run is that this death of privacy may encourage is the congruence of actions with beliefs. In other words, the "death of privacy" may lead to the "death of hyprocrisy". The cost, I suspect, will be quite high in the interim, but if the end result is that it becomes impossible for people to say and do one thing in private, yet campaign against that very thing in public, then the hypocrisy that privacy allows may be faced and resolved. Lots of room for discussion there I think. Politicians who preach one thing (Al Gore and conservation for example), yet practice something else, might start to actually live the life that they advocate for others. Religious leaders who preach against homosexuality, yet pay gay prostitutes for services will either have to leave their religious positions, or start to advocate the acceptances of other sexual lifestyles. The end result may be a society in which the things that people say, and stand for, are the actual things that they believe. But getting from "here" to "there" will likely be a hard road. FirmKY

pahunkboy -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (3/1/2007 4:14:06 PM)
Dear firm, I agree. As a kid- I remember the teachers saying "this will go down in your permanent record"- as a kid that was a scarey thought. The thing is now- there IS A PERMANENT record. Irregardless of weather the data is correct or not- opens a can of snakes. ANyone who has fought transunion, equifax, credit reporting agencies is well aware how wrong information appears. In comes data mining- per the net. Anything you ever done online- brought up on your credit report. Its coming. If you signed a guest book- bamn. Posted on a message board, bamm. If someone shady emails you will a bunch of hoodlims, bamm. The 3 credit bureaus have already stated- they have this in action- conveniently- I get the collection agency trade magazines. [along with other trades] On the other side of the coin, I can archive old family papers- 40 years old- and preserve them digitally. Greed, money, sex, power, runs the world. Men get good careers so as to buy the lady a safe cave; survival of the fitest. money = wealth = good bread winner = 1st choice at best pussy. the best ladies arent going to waste time on men who cant protect and offer a cave--; so in one regard; its all about the race to the best----the golden ring. boys with fancy toys are ok- but top choice ladies wasnt the max. the fitest man gets the knck out looking lady- best sex- the best orgasms- the chase for the perfect orgasm makes the world go round. right?

sleazy -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (3/1/2007 4:20:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SusanofO It scares me that someone could committ ID Fraud w/my credit card information if they are a really good computer hacker (I use the web all the time for internet purchases). Slightly o/t but your credit card is far more at risk in a restaraunt than on the net (unless you fall for one of the phishing sites) Even the advent of "smart" cards here in the UK has not altered this fact despite the fact that in theory they need never touch your card, let alone see any names or numbers on it.

Real0ne -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (3/1/2007 8:17:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY pahunkboy, One of the things that I think may be good in the long run is that this death of privacy may encourage is the congruence of actions with beliefs. In other words, the "death of privacy" may lead to the "death of hyprocrisy". Kool so when can we start fucking in the middle of the street? i always wanted to take a walk through area 51 too, to name one of many places. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. ---James Madison quote: ORIGINAL: toservez Currently the government of China and the people on the whole cannot get enough of the capitalism concept. It really is only recent years that there basically were no such things as privately owned businesses and now the government is trying to make most things private. So there is still a lot of things intertwined and government pushed. fascinating

popeye1250 -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (3/1/2007 8:43:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy Dear firm, I agree. As a kid- I remember the teachers saying "this will go down in your permanent record"- as a kid that was a scarey thought. The thing is now- there IS A PERMANENT record. Irregardless of weather the data is correct or not- opens a can of snakes. ANyone who has fought transunion, equifax, credit reporting agencies is well aware how wrong information appears. In comes data mining- per the net. Anything you ever done online- brought up on your credit report. Its coming. If you signed a guest book- bamn. Posted on a message board, bamm. If someone shady emails you will a bunch of hoodlims, bamm. The 3 credit bureaus have already stated- they have this in action- conveniently- I get the collection agency trade magazines. [along with other trades] On the other side of the coin, I can archive old family papers- 40 years old- and preserve them digitally. Greed, money, sex, power, runs the world. Men get good careers so as to buy the lady a safe cave; survival of the fitest. money = wealth = good bread winner = 1st choice at best pussy. the best ladies arent going to waste time on men who cant protect and offer a cave--; so in one regard; its all about the race to the best----the golden ring. boys with fancy toys are ok- but top choice ladies wasnt the max. the fitest man gets the knck out looking lady- best sex- the best orgasms- the chase for the perfect orgasm makes the world go round. right? PaHunk, right you are, those and credit card companies have far more information on you than "The government" ever will! The govt is a bunch of slackers compared to those cos. I laugh at people who think that they have people in the CIA or something "watching" the American People.

FirmhandKY -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (3/1/2007 11:31:22 PM)
Well, I will recommend a book to anyone who is really serious about privacy. I've got it (in pdf format, too). It appears at first glance to be one of those all too common shady "revenge" or "get out of paying taxes" type of books ... but it's not at all. I've read it, and based on my experience in the government, and in business, it's legal techniques that will work. JJ Luna's How To Be Invisible (Amazon) JJ Luna's How To Be Invisible (Canary Island Press) FirmKY

Real0ne -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (3/1/2007 11:40:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I laugh at people who think that they have people in the CIA or something "watching" the American People. Its just fucking hilarious! Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committe in confirmation hearings for the lead job at the CIA. Hayden's tenure at the NSA draws sharp questions. As the agency's director, he helped create and presided over its controversial domestic spying program. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5412297 --------------------------------- Gawd this is funny! The National Security Agency "has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data" provided by AT&T, Verizon Communications and BellSouth Corporation, Leslie Cauley first reported May 10, 2006, in USA Today. President George W. Bush "lied" when he said that NSA's "spying wasn't a domestic program," A. Alexander, wrote May 11, 2006, in The Progressive Daily Beacon. The NSA program "reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren't suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews," Cauley wrote. "It is exactly a domestic spy program and what's more AT&T, BellSouth, and Verizon have been assisting the Bush government in creating what is being described as, '[T]he largest database ever assembled in the world,' and the goal is 'to create a database of every call ever made' within America's borders," Alexander wrote. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) civil rights group filed complaints in more than 20 states [with] state utility commissions and attorneys general, and demanded the Federal Communications Commission look into the matter" on Wednesday May 24, 2006, "over allegations that phone companies shared customer records with the government's biggest spy agency." [3] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=George_W._Bush's_phone_records_spying Italic -------------------------------------------- Geezus i cant contain myself! ACLU Sues to Stop Illegal Spying on Americans t r u t h o u t \| Press Release Tuesday 17 January 2005 Prominent journalists, nonprofit groups, terrorism experts and community advocates join first lawsuit to challenge new NSA spying program. New York - Saying that the Bush administration's illegal spying on Americans must end, the American Civil Liberties Union today filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against the National Security Agency seeking to stop a secret electronic surveillance program that has been in place since shortly after September 11, 2001. "President Bush may believe he can authorize spying on Americans without judicial or Congressional approval, but this program is illegal and we intend to put a stop to it," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. "The current surveillance of Americans is a chilling assertion of presidential power that has not been seen since the days of Richard Nixon." http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/47/17020 ------------------------------------------------- What a joke! Spying eyes Bill Berkowitz WorkingForChange June 23, 2002 Coming at you sometime this summer will be Operation TIPS — a phalanx of one million well-trained civilian tipsters on the lookout for "suspicious terrorist activity." Operation TIPS (the Terrorist Information and Prevention System) is part of President Bush's new Citizens Corps — a division of his USA Freedom Corps initiative. Beginning in August 2002, Operation TIPS, a pilot project run out of the Department of Justice, will dispatch one million workers — likely to include truckers, letter carriers, train conductors, ship captains, utility employees and others — to run down and formally report "suspicious terrorist activity." A few weeks back, the FBI unveiled its new domestic surveillance agenda. According to the Washington Post: "New Justice Department guidelines... give FBI agents latitude to monitor Internet sites, libraries and religious institutions without first having to offer evidence of potential criminal activity." The FBI's new powers are in accord with a number of other recent policy changes that are eating away at our civil liberties. http://www.drugwar.com/pspyingeyes.shtm ----------------------------------- Oh i just cant take it anymore! Bush Defends CIA Nominee, Domestic Eavesdropping By Michael Bowman White House 13 May 2006 Bowman report - Download 362k audio clip Listen to Bowman report audio clip President Bush has defended his choice to head the Central Intelligence Agency, as well as controversial domestic eavesdropping efforts designed to prevent terrorist attacks. In his weekly radio address Saturday, Mr. Bush said General Michael Hayden is eminently qualified to lead the CIA, an agency he described as essential to the security of the American people. you know i never laughed so hard in my life! i have to stop now before i totally lose it cuz i cant contain myself any more i am laughing so damn hard! lol

farglebargle -> RE: The Death of Privacy. Who cares? (3/2/2007 12:19:08 AM)
Put too much effort into being "Invisible", and you're going to trip the "Terrorist" profile in the computers. Either way works out for The Man.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625